D&D 5E Damage Spell Scaling

[Tessarael]

Clarification to what I said earlier: I think the assumption by the 5E D&D creators is that higher level spellcasters won't typically bother casting say their 1st and 2nd level spells in combat to do damage, if they have 4th and 5th level spells in a big fight.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Low level spells can cause damage at higher tiers, but not directly.

Stuff like Hideous Laughter that makes foes prone so allies get Advantage or Dissonant Whispers that consume the target's reaction and induce AoOs that cause damage. (Giving the rogue another chance at Sneak Attack or the paladin to land a smite is nice)

At the very least, these kinds of spells can consume Legendary Resistances or counterspell & reaction, leaving your higher level slots for Counterspell/Dispel and firing off thr best high damage spells you've got when you think the Legendaries are gone.

 

[Emerikol]

One big difference in my games versus what I see nowadays is the adventuring day. The whole thought process is different.

1. For one. A wizard never casts a spell unless he thinks his fighters can't handle it or that they will take so much damage that the cleric will have to heal them excessively. That meant in some sessions the wizard would finish almost fully loaded. In others the group might be desperately trying to get to a safe place to rest.

2. Resting, leaving and returning, are all bad options unless you absolutely have to do it. The monsters will inevitably do one of two things if you leave. Either call in allies and retrench, adding traps and kill zones OR they will leave. Depending on how impressively they were defeated in the initial battles. So when dealing with a particular group in a dungeon you either finish them or you make your life a lot harder. Now a large dungeon may have many groups so right after defeating the last of a group and before you venture into another unknown territory is a great time to rest.

3. If I made up a very silly rule that said I'd roll d6 that could explode one time so a range of (1 to 11 with 1 to 5 being more common) to dictate how many encounters they had to face before resting of any sort whatsoever was possible their behavior would not change from what it is... I don't make them go that long but the nature of my games make going that long common.

4. And I don't have short rests but if I did, they'd be ten minutes and not one hour. A one hour rest suffers from most of the negatives of an overnight rest. It would give all the allied enemies time to unite and attack in force.

And yes there are always exceptions as I mentioned at the start. They are just exceptions groups can't count on when playing.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

Sure. So long as non casters can duplicate the effect of any 1st/2nd level spell proficiency modifier times per day, fluffed how they see fit.

 

[FrogReaver]

Um no, you misunderstand him completely. Now, he wrote that back in 2019, but he explicitly wants the low level spells to do more damage -- in other words, be useful as combat damaging spells.

Right. Shield, Silvery Barbs, Tasha’s Laughter, Web, Hold Person, etc are still likely going to be better spells to use with level 1 and 2 slots, even with the slight damage boosts I proposed.

What the change really does is give level 1 and 2 damage spells a reason to be used in the later game, albeit in most cases a suboptimal but maybe viable one.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

In case you missed the memo - I'm not happy with not being able to cast low level spells for damage - or let me rephrase that before someone pedantically attacks it - I'm not happy that low level spell slots are effectively worthless for damage spells as you level.

My proposed change fixes that problem without really impacting the martial / caster divide.

That fighters are worse than casters is not an excuse to avoid fixing things about the wizard.

We're only talking opinions here, but the Wizard and other spellcasters aren't broken. Other than cantrips that scale for basic offensive actions, for levelled spells, it is the spell-slot that reflects increases of power, not the original spell level

Low level spells should not get better for free. A level 1 spell should not auto-scale higher than a higher level spell.

Low level spells tend to have more robust functionality/area/status effects, when compared to cantrips. They have their uses. A 1st level Thunderwave is sometimes what you want over a 3d10 single-target firebolt.

 

[FrogReaver]

We're only talking opinions here, but the Wizard and other spellcasters aren't broken. Other than cantrips that scale for basic offensive actions, for levelled spells, it is the spell-slot that reflects increases of power, not the original spell level

Low level spells should not get better for free. A level 1 spell should not auto-scale higher than a higher level spell.

Low level spells tend to have more robust functionality/area/status effects, when compared to cantrips. They have their uses. A 1st level Thunderwave is sometimes what you want over a 3d10 single-target firebolt.

Most of the good spells do scale. Shield spell absorbs more damage because higher level monsters attack harder. Tasha’s laughter disabling a dragon is stronger than it disabling a goblin. Etc. the damage spells are one of the most notable exceptions to this.

 

[Mirrorrorrim]

Most of the good spells do scale. Shield spell absorbs more damage because higher level monsters attack harder. Tasha’s laughter disabling a dragon is stronger than it disabling a goblin. Etc. the damage spells are one of the most notable exceptions to this.

1st and 2nd level damage spells have their purpose in both early levels, and as prepared up-castable options at higher levels. And it is ok for a spellcaster to swap out their preferred loadout as they gain experience, if they don't value those spells at later levels. They can free up their utility if they so wish.

But ultimately, a 1st level spell slot should not rival the damage of a higher-level spell slot. Cantrips are a different beast, as they provide a different baseline service. At-will, reliable low level damage options. Even as they scale, a Ray of Frost being a single target attack is for use when you don't want to use a spell slot.

Also, if a martial character gets access to a 1st or 2nd level spell, they just autoscale like a full spellcaster? What about spells from magic items?

 

[Horwath]

1st and 2nd level damage spells have their purpose in both early levels, and as prepared up-castable options at higher levels. And it is ok for a spellcaster to swap out their preferred loadout as they gain experience, if they don't value those spells at later levels. They can free up their utility if they so wish.

But ultimately, a 1st level spell slot should not rival the damage of a higher-level spell slot. Cantrips are a different beast, as they provide a different baseline service. At-will, reliable low level damage options. Even as they scale, a Ray of Frost being a single target attack is for use when you don't want to use a spell slot.

Also, if a martial character gets access to a 1st or 2nd level spell, they just autoscale like a full spellcaster? What about spells from magic items?

this.

3d8 is great damage for 1st level slot at levels 1-4. later not as much.
why waste 1st level slot for 3d8 when you can do 2d10 at 5th level with no cost at all.
keep that slot for Shield, Absorb elements, Silvery barbs.

but, damage scaling for increasing spell levels is horrible.
and some higher damage spells are too weak in damage.
Except Meteor Swarm

 

[kigmatzomat]

The damage scaling is a design choice, not a bug. You can look at everything from kobolds to trolls to dragons and see how the spell level lethality has dropped.

5e Kobolds typically nerd to be hit by multiple magic missiles while in 1e it was one kobold, one missile. Once upon a time, tier 2 casters could kill trolls with a single 3rd level fireball. Now it's possible for a CR5 troll to survive Meteor swarm from a 17th level caster and a 3rd level fireball is mathematically incapable of killing the average troll.

Then there are the reduced spell slots. In ye olden tymes, casters could cast multiple 9th level spells per day. And yes, it took them 4 days to recover their spell slots but when they have 4-5x as many spell slots as a 5e character, that's not really the balance shift you think it is.

These aren't accidents, they are design choices, intended to prevent high level casters from dominating game play.

All the house rules people used to add to make casters weaker is already baked into 5e.